4.h3? makes no sense at all. After 4...Bg7 black is a pawn up with a very good game. Sooner or later white has to try to undermine black's kingside pawn chain with either g3 (no longer possible) or h4 (possible but with loss of tempo on main lines.
Originally posted by hammster21 The Kieseritzky is a difficult line to play against, thats why I prefer 4.h3 against it. It does open a severe hole on g3, which can spell disaster if penetrated by a Knight, but it also locks in blacks weak pawn at g5, which he may have to take time to protect. I like this move as it keeps White's king side more compact while still opening up blacks. In ...[text shortened]... Bg8 43. h5 Bxc4 44. h6 Bg8 45. Kf6
{chessmatic forfeits on time} 1-0
4. h4!! is essential.
If you are going to play a gambit such as this you need to go all the way. If you are worried about this move it is not 4. h3?? you should be playing but 2. f4 that you should not be playing.
Originally posted by Dragon Fire 4. h4!! is essential.
If you are going to play a gambit such as this you need to go all the way. If you are worried about this move it is not 4. h3?? you should be playing but 2. f4 that you should [b]not be playing.[/b]
I agree that you should go all the way but do it with 4.Bc4!
As I mentioned in a previous post, the Kieseritzky (4.h4 g4 5.Ne5) isn't doing that well currently, though I suppose with care white should be able to reach something close to equality. After 4.Bc4 black can play 4...g4 leading to the Muzio (5.0-0), which is probably at best a draw for white (ditto 5.Ne5). But I would normally play 4...Bg7, after which the main line goes 5.d4 d6 6.0-0 h6 7.c3 Nc6. Now black's two main tries here (8.h4 Nf6 9.hxg5 Nh5!) and (8.g3 Bh3!) are both looking fairly unpromising for white, so some sort of improvement is required.
Originally posted by Northern Lad As I mentioned in a previous post, the Kieseritzky (4.h4 g4 5.Ne5) isn't doing that well currently, though I suppose with care white should be able to reach something close to equality.
Not sure I'm looking for equality with white playing such a wild opening. An uncompromising quick win is the objective, surely? As a general rule I have had good results both here and OTB with the Kieseritzky although I must confess being lucky a few times and having difficulty achieving anything against better players. I will continue to play it as most of my opponents don't know how best to capitalise although if I start losing I might have to concede defeat and play 4. Bc4. Until then 4. h4!! rules OK!
This was my latest Kieseritzky. In Game 4145948 I was in serious trouble and got off the hook only because of 2 inaccurate moves from black at move 19 and 20 with the latter allowing a fork of his King and Rook after which I was simply a pawn up with a better placed king, in a won position. I was lucky not to have lost this.
Originally posted by Dragon Fire Not sure I'm looking for equality with white playing such a wild opening. An uncompromising quick win is the objective, surely? As a general rule I have had good results both here and OTB with the Kieseritzky although I must confess being lucky a few times and having difficulty achieving anything against better players. I will continue to play it as most ...[text shortened]... ply a pawn up with a better placed king, in a won position. I was lucky not to have lost this.
what is the point of h4 when black just plays g4 like he was already going to do?
The extremely popular Fischer Defense (1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 d6 planning h6 and g5 but only rarely Bg4, a natural-looking but often weak move that beginners play too early) is complicated and subtle. After Bobby Fischer lost a game defending the King's Gambit to Boris Spassky at Mar del Plata 1960, he promptly went to work at devising a new King's Gambit defense. In a 1962 article titled "A Bust to the King's Gambit"[3] he put forth this idea and claimed that it refuted the King's Gambit, which was clearly not the case. The article concluded with the famously arrogant line, "Of course white can always play differently in which case he merely loses differently." Nonetheless, the article was possibly the most influential ever written about an opening, and ever since the King's Gambit has been rare in Grandmaster play
One article, and GMs do not play this gambit anymore. Ha. Influent article writter 😛
Originally posted by ivan2908 Interesting Wikipedia qoute :
The extremely popular Fischer Defense (1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Nf3 d6 planning h6 and g5 but only rarely Bg4, a natural-looking but often weak move that beginners play too early) is complicated and subtle. After Bobby Fischer lost a game defending the King's Gambit to Boris Spassky at Mar del Plata 1960, he promptly went to wo ...[text shortened]...
One article, and GMs do not play this gambit anymore. Ha. Influent article writter 😛
You need to stop quoting wiki & do some of your own research.
Plenty of GM's still play the KG.
Originally posted by ivan2908 I quoted wiki 1 or 2 time in my all life 🙂
Ok, I'll help you out.
Federov
Short
Gallagher
Morozevich
Shabalov
Polgar
Are GM's who have played & still play the King's Gambit 40 years after the Fischer "bust"!
Originally posted by Squelchbelch Ok, I'll help you out.
Federov
Short
Gallagher
Morozevich
Shabalov
Polgar
Are GM's who have played & still play the King's Gambit 40 years after the Fischer "bust"!
Originally posted by Squelchbelch Ok, I'll help you out.
Federov
Short
Gallagher
Morozevich
Shabalov
Polgar
Are GM's who have played & still play the King's Gambit 40 years after the Fischer "bust"!
Originally posted by tomtom232 can't white play 4.Bc4 5.Ne5 anyways?
You mean 4.Bc4 g4 5.Ne5 Qh4+ 6.Kf1? Yes, I believe it is quite playable. Indeed, I've played it myself at least once on RHP. However, my opponent (a much lower rated player) managed to equalise very easily, and I have not been able to find an improvement for white. But, as I said in a previous post, I think the real problem for white is if black doesn't play 4...g4.
14 Jan '08 13:34
Kings gambit lines....
Back to Top